Green energy pays for itself in lives saved from smog

SWITCHING to clean energy might seem like the expensive option, but it would quickly pay for itself. The reason? Reducing our reliance on fossil fuels will cut air pollution and save millions of lives – lives with an economic value that outweighs the cost of green investment.

New work suggests that 1.3 million early deaths could be avoided every year by 2050. From estimates of how much society values a human life, Jason West at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill and colleagues deduce that alternative energy supplies should be worth the cost.

As well as releasing greenhouse gases that warm the planet, burning fossil fuels gives off large quantities of polluting chemicals. These can build up into dense choking smogs, like the one that smothered Beijing in January.

To work out the economic benefits and costs of switching to clean energy, the team estimated how much air pollution would fall if fossil fuel use was slashed. They simulated global air pollution in 2030, 2050 and 2100, using two scenarios: one in which humanity cuts its greenhouse gas emissions substantially by 2100, and a control, in which emissions are not cut at all. Then, using the patterns of global air pollution and epidemiological data, they calculated how many people would die from the pollution.

In the 2030 model, half a million premature deaths were avoided every year by cutting fossil fuels, and this rose to 2.2 million per year in 2100. In reality, lives would be saved sooner than 2030 if the measures were applied today.

West's team then estimated the economic benefits using a statistic called the Value of Statistical Life. This is a measure of how much value society puts on a person's life – based on how much an individual would be willing to pay to reduce the risk of premature death. The value varies according to the country they live in, but can be as high as $7.4 million.

Combining the two figures, the team found that for every tonne of greenhouse gas not emitted, the average benefit was between $50 and $380, depending on where you are in the world.

In the 2030 and 2050 scenarios, for most countries, these benefits outweighed the cost of cutting emissions, which was less than $100 per tonne. The benefits were less clear by 2100, because by then the easiest reductions had already been achieved, so further cuts would be more expensive – around $300 per tonne. Even then, the benefits are of the same order as the costs, says West (Nature Climate Change, doi.org/nwt).

What's more, the calculations do not include the extra work people can do if they live longer or the costs of caring for people suffering from pollution-related disease, so the economic benefits are likely underestimated.

Because the effect of cutting emissions on extreme weather will not become apparent until the end of the century, politicians tend to prevaricate over cuts. But the consequences of a drop in air pollution changes that, says West. "This gives us a benefit that's immediate."

This article appeared in print under the headline "Green energy bill balanced by lives saved from smog"

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.